GTX 560 Coming soon!

[bamtan2]

If the HD 6950 1GB were the same price as the 560 then we would be talking but at this point I see no reason for the $10 price premium.

I think Eyefinity (driving more than two monitors from one card) commands a premium larger than any other exclusive feature. Bigger than CUDA, physx, and even extra overclocking or quietness. All things being equal, the AMD card should be $10 more.

[E30M3]

I think Eyefinity (driving more than two monitors from one card) commands a premium larger than any other exclusive feature. Bigger than CUDA, physx, and even extra overclocking or quietness. All things being equal, the AMD card should be $10 more.

[Mungri]

I think Eyefinity (driving more than two monitors from one card) commands a premium larger than any other exclusive feature. Bigger than CUDA, physx, and even extra overclocking or quietness. All things being equal, the AMD card should be $10 more.

Well, by that logic, Nvidia should have a $30 premium for Cuda, 3D vision, and Physx then?

Eyefinity isnt really that big a deal, most people only use one monitor.

[Sam_oslo]

I think Eyefinity (driving more than two monitors from one card) commands a premium larger than any other exclusive feature. Bigger than CUDA, physx, and even extra overclocking or quietness. All things being equal, the AMD card should be $10 more.

We are looking at mainstream cards, and this is aiming to "normal" gamers on (24").

Those on multi monitor who need Eyefinity, would need high-end Cards for those resolution. We just got GTX580-3G for those people.

560 has the upper hand in performance/OCing/power-usage. AMD can't ask $10 more. if they try, they have to drop the price (again) to be able to sell it.

[bamtan2]

Eyefinity isnt really that big a deal, most people only use one monitor.

I know. Even more people don't use cuda or physx.

[EnJoY]

GTX 560 Ti Review Here: http://www.techreaction.net/2011/01/...gf114-is-mean/

Little card packs a lot of punch.

[bamtan2]

So benchmarks show 560 overclocked makes up the difference between it and 6950 2gb. They're basically the same speed. That means you still prefer the 6950 2gb, because it turns into a 6970. So that is worth a premium. The $50 question is: will 6950 1gb unlock too.

[Sam_oslo]

I know. Even more people don't use cuda or physx.

This discussion should be about Price/performance/Ocin/power-usage. These are the most important factors for this fight in maistream.

We can always try to bring in Eyefinity, Cuda, PhysX, etc ... these are "side-factors" and may appeal to some propel too, but they won't make a blow

Drivers are very important too, and nVidia has usually better drivers, but i don't think they could ask for $10 more without taking the upper hand in performance/Ocin/power-usage.

[Manicdan]

im seeing power usage as a mixed bag
TPU shows the 560 as way higher than the 6950 2GB

[Pillo-kun]

wow i dont think i live inte the same world as some of ya guys that write that a gtx560 is better than hd hd6950 and even the hd 6970... i trust sweclockers.com and anandtech the most and the 560 fails to bring down the hd 6950......

[imamage]

They did.

AMD should have done that earlier
But it's still not too late , Get the HD6950 1GB version out to retail ASAP
and they can save the day

But for us (consumer) , price cut are always nice

[Mungri]

wow i dont think i live inte the same world as some of ya gays that write that a gtx560 is better than hd hd6950 and even the hd 6970... i trust sweclockers.com and anandtech the most and the 560 fails to bring down the hd 6950......

Anandtech were using reference GTX 560s running at 822 Mhz, and where they were behind the 6950, it was only by around 2-5 FPS?

The whole buzz around the GTX 560, as it was with the GTX 460 is the overclock potential of these cards, and there are plenty of reports showing the GTX 560s running at speeds over 1050 Mhz.

Although the biggest deciding factor for me with video cards these days is the cooler and appearance. Every 6950 I have seen so far has the horrible reference cooler, and the MSI Twinfrozr 6950 carries a huge price premium and cannot be unlocked to a 6970. Whereas with these GTX 560s, the MSI version is cheaper than the others, and its a very well built model with a far superior than reference cooler.

[Pillo-kun]

sure a gtx 460/560 oc a hefty 150-200mhz... but so does a lot of other card as well... so the only thing that i look at is the price and the performance and 560 does not impress my much... yet :P

[[XC] hipno650]

sure a gtx 460/560 oc a hefty 150-200mhz... but so does a lot of other card as well... so the only thing that i look at is the price and the performance and 560 does not impress my much... yet :P

how many AMD cards clock like that? none...

the GTX 560Ti is a plain beast after OCing it. it is THE card to have for a 20-23 inch screen, no two ways around it. considering the HWC card hit 990 on stock voltage... also notice the OC comparison between the 1GB 6950 and the GTX 560Ti, the 560 ends up a decent bunch faster...

[Pillo-kun]

ok the hd 69xx are no oc kings... but hd68xx does 100-150+... and the older gf100 does like 200... and all things get even at the end...

[SKYMTL]

in case heat cooling and 560 consumes more..... not less
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4135/n...-250-market/16

Different environments, different test conditions, GPU samples, etc can all impact upon the results methinks.

[Mungri]

GTX 460s OC from 675 Mhz to 900+ with increased volts, and the GTZ 560s are OCing from 822 Mhz to 1050 Mhz+.

Thats quite a lot of free performance. ATI's HD 5000 range was as good as that too, but the HD 6000s are not, most of them max out at a 950 Mhz overclock.

ATI cards appealed to me throughout the HD 3000 - 5000 range. The current ones just dont for some reason.

[kjeldoran]

Amazon has some GTX560s listed. I didn't see any on newegg though. I ordered the MSI Twin Frozr II today for upgrades. I decided on the gtx560 since it will fit in the SG06 without modifications. The radeon 6950 is like a 1/2" too long and I don't feel like modding my case. Similar performance with a shorter length.
MSI:
http://www.amazon.com/MSI-N560GTX-Tw.../ref=de_a_smtd
Galaxy:
http://www.amazon.com/Galaxy-Geforce...f=pd_rhf_p_t_1

Edit: newegg has them
Gigabyte:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814125363
Galaxy:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814162074
EVGA:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814130604
Palit:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814261101
2nd Palit:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814261099

Funny thing...the sonic version is $10 cheaper than the regular Palit card...weird lol.

[kaktus1907]

http://techreport.com/articles.x/20293/14

[Sam_oslo]

....
Palit:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814261101
2nd Palit:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814261099

Funny thing...the sonic version is $10 cheaper than the regular Palit card...weird lol.

That "regular Palit" is a 2GB, that's why.

It's good to see 2GBs are showing up this early tho. This is second one, Gainward has shown a "Phantom" 2GB too.

[tajoh111]

Mixed bag compared to the 1gb and 2gb 6950. For the consumer, depending on the features people want, they are all viable cards if only because of the pricedrop AMD just brought about.

This card to me seems more of success for NV as a business, as it seems they have caught up to AMD from a die to performance standpoint. Who would have thought this could happen so soon? This is partially only because of Nvidia's own effort, but like Saaya, I think this was more as a result of AMD not anticipating the refresh of Fermi so soon and them being far too conservative.

AMD prior to the refresh was thought to have a 1 generation gap ahead in terms tech. That advantage is gone and it seems if anything AMD has gone from the offensive to a defensive product release, where they release products to prevent marketshare lose rather than gain it.

[RaZz!]

That looks pretty significant to me. [...]

significant? in this chart we're looking at crap fps from every card. in the end, it doesn't matter if you have 15 or 19fps. it's unplayable either way.

however, i agree that the radeon's min fps look pretty bad in many reviews (however, not in all - i guess it's very dependant on the benchmarked scene...), but that's also one of the reasons i'm happy to bought a gtx570 over the 6950/70.

[Sam_oslo]

Mixed bag compared to the 1gb and 2gb 6950. For the consumer, depending on the features people want, they are all viable cards if only because of the pricedrop AMD just brought about.

This card to me seems more of success for NV as a business, as it seems they have caught up to AMD from a die to performance standpoint. Who would have thought this could happen so soon? This is partially only because of Nvidia's own effort, but like Saaya, I think this was more as a result of AMD not anticipating the refresh of Fermi so soon and them being far too conservative.

AMD prior to the refresh was thought to have a 1 generation gap ahead in terms tech. That advantage is gone and it seems if anything AMD has gone from the offensive to a defensive product release, where they release products to prevent marketshare lose rather than gain it.

Both you and Saaya has several good points there. But I don't think this "defeat" is because of their lack of effort or activities. They have put a lot of efforts and manged to release a couple of "new generations" in a relatively short short time. Lets give them some credit for that.

AMD seams to have underestimated the flexibility of Fermi-architecture. They "tough" 580 would be some kind of "minor" improvement of 480. They manged to beat 480, and did a really good job there actually, but their "calculations" didn't expect such a big improvements on 580, because they underestimated the flexibility of Fermi-architecture, and from there, the whole 5xx-series become a big "defeat" for them.

EDIT:
But the fight is not over, and that "defeat" is not so secured yet. The war is just starting. The final chapter of this round will be written in a price-war. Mainstream is all about price/performance, after all, and AMD is not fatally behind when it comes performance either. AMD still can put up a good price-fight. It will be really interesting to follow the price-development in both camps in near future.

[Krizby87]

Well I think us consumers are the winners here , I remember back when I paid 300$ for the Nvidia 6800, I couldn't even maxed out counter strike: source without some jerkiness in a 32 players map @ 1280x1024 4AA, now we can spend ~250$ to get maximum detail @ 1920x1200. Let's the war continue...

[Johnny87au]

Kinda smart idea on behalf of AMD releasing the 11.1a i think it is which should keep the 69XX cards above the 560's kinda smart strategy.. These 560's do clock like kings, even up to 1200 without any problems on air..